Home Blog Page 77

“Government Knows Every Terrorist”: Gumi’s explosive claim sparks fury amid Nigeria’s worsening security crisis

Nigeria’s escalating security crisis took a dramatic turn after Kaduna-based Islamic cleric Ahmad Gumi made a startling claim: the federal government knows the identities and locations of terrorists operating across the country.

The allegation comes as armed groups continue to unleash devastating attacks on communities and military formations, often seizing weapons and leaving trails of destruction across several regions.

For many Nigerians living under the constant threat of kidnappings, banditry and insurgent violence, the remark has revived a controversial statement often attributed to former military ruler Sani Abacha—that “if insurgency lasts for more than 24 hours, the government has a hand in it.”

Speaking in a recent interview, Gumi said authorities are not in the dark about those behind the violence.

“The government knows every terrorist by name and location,” he said.

According to the cleric, his controversial trips into forests to negotiate with armed groups are not carried out independently but with the knowledge and involvement of security agencies.

“I don’t go alone,” he explained. “I go with the police, the military and other security agencies.”

He added that some of the journeys required mediation through traditional authorities.

“I would go to the Emirs. In fact, when we went to one forest, I even went with women into the bush,” he said.

Dialogue With Armed Groups

Gumi also renewed his call for negotiations with insurgent and separatist groups across the country, including the secessionist movement Indigenous People of Biafra and Islamist insurgents such as Boko Haram, as well as armed bandit groups operating in northern Nigeria.

He said he would support any group willing to lay down its weapons and pursue peace through dialogue.

“Dialogue can bring peace and we are men of peace,” Gumi said. “Even IPOB, which wants secession—if they are ready to put down their arms and come to the round table to discuss, I’m ready to support them. All we don’t want is violence.”

“What They Say Is Not What They Do”

The cleric also pointed to widespread distrust between citizens and the Nigerian government, saying many Nigerians believe official promises rarely translate into real action.

“What they say is not what they do,” he said.

Rather than relying overwhelmingly on military force, Gumi argued that Nigeria must adopt a broader strategy that tackles the underlying drivers of insecurity.

Experts, he said, increasingly believe that up to 75 percent of the solution should be non-kinetic, focusing on social and economic reforms.

He cited failing infrastructure, erratic electricity, poor healthcare and a struggling education system as factors that fuel instability.

“Look at the road network—it is terribly bad. Electricity is erratic and very expensive,” he said.

“Don’t talk about healthcare. Anyone who has the means—even our wealthy people—flies abroad for treatment.”

In such circumstances, he questioned whether billions spent on defence would achieve lasting security.

“In a situation where nothing is working,” he said, “should the priority be pumping trillions into defence, or investing in basic amenities that improve the lives of the people?”

A Nation Under Siege

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, has faced years of overlapping security threats, from insurgency in the northeast to banditry and mass kidnappings across the northwest and separatist tensions in the southeast.

Gumi’s remarks are likely to intensify an already heated national conversation over whether the country’s security strategy is addressing the root causes of violence, or merely responding to its symptoms.

For millions of Nigerians living with daily fear, the stakes could hardly be higher.

Editorial: A Diplomatic Travesty – Tinubu’s cast of ambassadorial jokers

By Huhuonline.com

Nigeria’s diplomatic service has always walked a delicate line between professional competence and political patronage. But the latest ambassadorial appointments approved by Bola Ahmed Tinubu push that uneasy compromise into outright farce, making Nigeria the laughing stock of the international community. What should have been a sober exercise in projecting Nigeria’s interests abroad has instead become a recycling program for political retirees, failed office holders and controversial figures whose greatest qualification appears to be proximity to power.

Sixty-five ambassadors have now been assigned to Nigerian missions around the world. On paper, the list appears balanced: 31 non-career ambassadors alongside 34 career diplomats drawn from the Nigerian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In practice, however, the non-career segment reads less like a roster of strategic envoys and more like a retirement benefits scheme for the politically connected.

Consider the cast. Former Abia State governor Okezie Ikpeazu is headed to Spain. Former aviation minister Femi Fani-Kayode is being dispatched to Germany. Senator-businessman Jimoh Ibrahim will represent Nigeria at the United Nations. Former senator Grace Bent is bound for Togo, while former presidential aide Reno Omokri is slated for Mexico. The question Nigerians are asking is painfully simple: on what diplomatic achievements are these appointments based? Ambassadorships are not ceremonial baubles to be pinned on loyalists. They are frontline instruments of statecraft. Ambassadors negotiate trade deals, defend national interests, manage crises involving citizens abroad and shape the country’s global reputation. These are not roles for political passengers.

Yet the Tinubu administration appears determined to treat diplomacy as a reward for political endurance rather than a profession demanding skill, expertise and credibility. Take the decision to send Fani-Kayode to Berlin. Germany is not a peripheral posting; it is Europe’s largest economy and a key partner in trade, technology and development cooperation. It requires a diplomat capable of navigating complex economic and political terrain. Instead, Nigeria is sending a figure better known for political controversy and incendiary rhetoric than for diplomatic finesse. Or consider the appointment of Jimoh Ibrahim as Nigeria’s permanent representative to the United Nations. The UN is the apex arena of global diplomacy; an institution where experienced negotiators battle daily over sanctions, peacekeeping mandates, development frameworks and international law. The idea that such a sensitive platform should be entrusted to someone whose public record is defined more by political maneuvering than diplomatic engagement would be laughable if it were not so consequential.

Then there is Ikpeazu, whose governorship in Abia was dogged by persistent criticisms over economic stagnation and governance failures. Spain, meanwhile, is one of Nigeria’s major European partners in trade, migration cooperation and security. Yet Abuja has decided that what Madrid needs most is a former governor with no known background in diplomacy. One could go on down the list—politicians, former office holders, loyalists, and familiar names from Nigeria’s endless carousel of elite recycling.

The tragedy is that Nigeria already possesses a professional diplomatic corps brimming with capable officers who have spent decades mastering the craft of international relations. These career diplomats understand the intricacies of protocol, negotiation, bilateral agreements and multilateral institutions. Many have served in difficult postings across the world, often with minimal resources, quietly defending Nigeria’s interests.

Yet in the grand hierarchy of patronage, they are perpetually overshadowed by politically appointed ambassadors parachuted into plum postings with little preparation and even less experience. This pattern is not new. Successive administrations have used ambassadorial slots to reward loyalists and soothe bruised political egos. But the scale and brazenness of the current appointments suggest a government that has learned nothing from decades of diplomatic underperformance.

Nigeria today faces enormous international challenges: declining foreign investment, complex security partnerships, regional instability in West Africa and fierce global competition for capital. In such an environment, diplomacy cannot be reduced to ceremonial ribbon-cutting. It requires competence. What message does Nigeria send when it fills embassies with individuals whose primary claim to distinction is their proximity to domestic politics? What signal does it send to investors when ambassadors appear less like professional negotiators and more like political appointees seeking soft landings?

Perhaps the most revealing detail in the government’s announcement was the directive that the ambassadors-designate undergo an “induction programme” before deployment. One almost laughs at the understatement. Induction implies orientation. What many of these appointees require is not orientation but education; an introduction to diplomacy itself. But a crash course in protocol cannot substitute for years of experience. Diplomacy is not a skill one acquires in a seminar.

The defenders of these appointments will argue that political ambassadors are common around the world. They are correct. The United States, for instance, occasionally appoints political donors or allies as envoys. But there is a difference between occasional patronage and wholesale substitution of expertise with loyalty. Moreover, even political ambassadors in major powers often bring significant professional or diplomatic credentials to the table.

In Nigeria’s case, the appointments often resemble little more than elite recycling. The deeper issue is what this says about the Tinubu administration’s understanding of governance. At a time when the country needs competence in every sector; from energy to security to foreign policy, the government appears more interested in distributing political consolation prizes. Diplomacy has become the spoils of domestic politics. 

Nigeria deserves better. Its embassies should be staffed by the best minds in foreign policy, trade diplomacy, conflict mediation and international law. They should be led by individuals whose credibility commands respect in foreign capitals. Instead, the country risks turning its diplomatic missions into outposts of political patronage and retirement homes for failed politicians. In the end, the tragedy of these appointments is not merely that they reward mediocrity. It is that they squander opportunity.

Every embassy is a gateway for trade, investment, cultural exchange and strategic influence. Filling those gateways with underqualified envoys is akin to locking the doors and throwing away the key. For a country that claims continental leadership and global ambition, that is not just disappointing. It is profoundly unserious.

Insecurity: Help! We no longer go to our farms — Ondo resident’s lament

Some residents of Ilu-Abo in Akure North Local Government Area of Ondo State on Tuesday blocked the Akure/Owo highway over alleged incessant killings and kidnappings in the area.

The protesters alleged that one of the residents was killed on his farm by suspected gunmen on Tuesday morning.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that residents, mostly youths, blocked the flow of traffic, leaving motorists stranded on the expressway.

The protesters were carrying placards with various inscriptions such as “We Are Dying, Save Our Soul”, “Mr Governor, Please Assist Us”, “Our Children Are in Danger”, and “We Cannot Go to Farms Again” among others.

One of the residents, who identified himself as Joseph Adee, told newsmen that they could not go to their farms due to the incessant kidnappings and killings in the area.

The protesters appealed to the government to help them address the insecurity ravaging the area.

“We will not leave here unless Gov. Lucky Aiyedatiwa comes to address us because we can no longer go to our farms due to insecurity,” he said.

Addressing the protesters, Mr. Adebowale Lawal, the Commissioner of Police in the state, appealed to them to allow free vehicular movement, but was rebuffed.

Lawal assured the residents that the security agencies, including the Amotekun Corps and the police, would ensure the safety of lives and property.

The CP promised to deploy additional policemen and tactical units to address the insecurity and assured that police operatives, along with other security agencies, would beef up security in the communities.

“We are fully aware of your grievances, and concerted efforts are ongoing to address the prevailing security challenges in the area.

“Police and other security agencies are working tirelessly to ensure the safety of all residents,” he said.

The police boss also visited the traditional ruler of Ilu-Abo, Oba Olu Falae, and told him the efforts being made by security agencies to curb insecurity in the area.

NAN reports that at Ilu-Abo, gunmen recently kidnapped a woman, and a couple, while a businessman was shot, which resulted in his death.

On Monday, Mr. Joseph Aladesuyi, the Secretary of Okeluju Local Council Development Area (LCDA) under Akoko North-West Local Council Area of the state, was kidnapped alongside two others on his farm at Ilu-Abo by gunmen.

How Nigerian Army allegedly kept Major Shamsudeen in solitary confinement after withdrawing troops to avoid terrorists’ ambush

The Nigerian Army has detained Major Shamsudeen Sani, a frontline officer who has spent years fighting Boko Haram and ISWAP insurgents in northeastern Nigeria, placing him in solitary confinement for months.

According to SaharaReporters, this was after the Major reportedly withdrew his troops from a position under heavy terrorist threat in order to prevent casualties and seek reinforcement.

A security source who spoke with SaharaReporters on Tuesday disclosed that the officer has been held incommunicado in Maiduguri, the capital of Borno State, without access to his family or legal representation.

According to the source, Major Sani, who hails from Jalingo in Taraba State, was arrested after allegedly withdrawing his troops from a battlefield position during operations against insurgents linked to Boko Haram and the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP).

The officer was reportedly accused by military authorities of abandoning or overrunning his location, an allegation that has led to his prolonged detention under strict conditions.

“He is a brother of mine from Taraba State and his hometown is Jalingo,” the security source said.

“He was shortlisted into the Nigerian Army Short Service Course in 2012 and since then he has always been posted to volatile areas of Maiduguri to fight Boko Haram insurgents and ISWAP.”

The source explained that throughout his career, Major Sani had consistently served in dangerous combat zones, spending years on the frontline in the counter-insurgency war in Nigeria’s northeast.

However, the officer’s attempt to protect the lives of his soldiers during a recent operation reportedly led to his arrest and detention.

“He has been arrested and detained by the Nigerian Army in Maiduguri and has been kept in solitary confinement for months over allegations that he overran his location,” the source said.

“Is it a crime to tactically withdraw from a location to regroup or await reinforcement?” the source asked.

The source further revealed that Major Sani has been completely cut off from his family and legal representatives since his detention began.

“He has been kept incommunicado away from his two wives and even lawyers do not have access to him,” the source said.

Major Sani, according to the source, is married to two wives and has children, all of whom have been denied the opportunity to see him since his arrest.

“He has two wives and children and all of them have been denied access to see him just because he was protecting his troops from being killed,” the source added.

The security insider expressed frustration over the military’s harsh treatment of a dedicated officer who had spent over a decade risking his life in service to the country.

“This is someone I know and how dedicated he has always been to the safety of Nigeria, but look at how the Nigerian Army is paying him back,” the source said.

“For 14 years since he passed out from the Army, he has always been posted to volatile areas.”

The source also noted that the ongoing war against insurgency has already claimed the lives of several officers from Taraba State, including a recent casualty.

“Just recently we lost another brother in the Army from Taraba, Major I.U. Mairiga, less than a week ago to the Boko Haram insurgents,” the source said.

“We do not want to lose another brother.”

According to the source, the continued detention of Major Sani has raised concerns among colleagues and acquaintances who fear that the officer is being unfairly punished for making a battlefield decision intended to preserve lives.

“If the Nigerian Army doesn’t want him, they should please dismiss him so that he can come back home to reunite with his family,” the source said. “We still love him.”

The source further criticised the worsening morale within the military, arguing that the treatment of officers like Major Sani sends a troubling message to soldiers risking their lives in the fight against terrorism.

“The Nigerian Army is making the entire profession a death sentence instead of it being a sacrifice for the country,” the source added.

As of the time of filing this report, the Nigerian Army had not publicly responded to the allegations surrounding Major Sani’s detention or the claims that he has been held without access to family members or legal counsel.

Nigeria’s military has been battling insurgency in the northeast for more than a decade, with troops regularly deployed to dangerous frontline positions across Borno and neighbouring states as part of operations against Boko Haram and ISWAP fighters.

However, the war has also been marked by repeated complaints from soldiers and insiders about harsh disciplinary measures, battlefield decisions being criminalised, and concerns over troop welfare and morale.

Hussaini v State and police interrogation guidelines, By Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN

INTRODUCTION

Crime detection and prevention come with their own challenges, strategies and peculiarities. In most cases, the details of what goes into criminal prosecution are largely unknown to the public. Law is very unique in its interpretation and application and unless properly guided, prosecutors face very deadly landmines in the course of handling serious criminal cases. Without doubt, the real prosecution starts from the period of investigation, arrest, detention and interrogation of the defendant. The process is so technical that any little error can be costly for the prosecutor. Especially in cases involving capital offences such as armed robbery or kidnapping where fatality has occurred, emotions run high and the tendency is to always assume the guilt of the defendant.

From that primitive perspective, all that matters is to get the defendant convicted at all costs, including possible coercion to obtain the famed confessional statement to ground conviction. Although the Administration of Criminal Justice Act 2015 and the Administration of Criminal Justice Laws of the various States of the Federation have attempted to simplify the process of interrogation of the defendant through video evidence and confirmation by counsel, the case of Hussaini v State has provided basic guidelines for this fundamental process that all investigators, prosecutors and defendants should become familiar with, especially in cases where the defendant is an illiterate.

The pain of losing a case due to technical errors can be very deep when one considers the fate of the family of the deceased victim, the efforts of law enforcement officers to apprehend the defendant and the resources expended by the state to prosecute him.

The Facts Of The Case

The facts of the case of Hussaini v State as reported in (2026) 3 NWLR (Pt.2031) 199 are that sometime in June, 2016, the appellant with other co-defendants conspired to rob and did rob one Tijjani Mohammed (now deceased) of his Samsung phone and money in the sum of N1,800 whilst armed with knives and cutlasses. Thereafter, they stabbed him in his chest and stomach which subsequently led to his death. They were charged with offences of Criminal Conspiracy contrary to section 97 of the Penal Code, Culpable Homicidepunishable with death contrary to section 221 of the Penal Code and Armed Robbery contrary to section 1(2) of the Robbery and Firearms (Special Provisions) Act, 1990. Upon arraignment at the trial court, the appellant pleaded not guilty to the three-count charge.

The prosecution called seven witnesses and tendered thirteen exhibits. The appellant testified for himself and called no witness. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court found the appellant guilty of the three count charge and he was subsequently convicted and sentenced to death by hanging. Aggrieved by the decision of the trial court, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which affirmed the judgment of the trial court. Further aggrieved, the appellant lodged an appeal to the Supreme Court.At the Supreme Court, the appellant contended largely that the procedure adopted by the prosecution witnesses in recording and translating the retracted confessional statements of the appellant was wrongful and ought to be rejected and that the respondent failed to discharge the burden placed on it to establish the three-count charge against the appellant. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.

The Mode of Obtaining Confessional Statements of Suspect or Accused Person by the Police:

The mode of obtaining confessional statements by the Police is to first administer the customary words of caution to the suspect or accused informing the suspect or accused of his right to keep silent as his words may be used against him. If the suspect or accused speaks or writes another language different from English language, the suspect or accused will make his statement in the language he understands. If he can write in vernacular, he should be allowed to write. If he cannot write, the Investigating Police Officer (IPO) who understands the said native language will write it down on his behalf. The statement will be read over to him, he will confirm it and sign or put his mark or signature.

Thereafter, an interpreter, usually the same IPO, will translate the statement to English language. The suspect or accused, the English version and the vernacular version of the statements will be taken to a Senior Police Officer if the statement is confessional in content. The suspect or accused will confirm before the Senior Police Officer that indeed he made the vernacular statement without duress. The Senior Police Officer will counter sign the English version. Where the accused or suspect can read and write English, he would write his statement. Where he cannot write but can speak English, he can be helped by the IPO to write it. The statement would be read over to him before he puts his mark or signature. If confessional in content, he would be taken before a Senior Police Officer to confirm that he indeed gave the statement without duress.

The interpreter may be sourced from the Police or from numerous non-uniform clerks etc who work with the Police. The important legal point is that the Police (Investigating Police Officer) where he understands the language of the suspect or accused will record in that language and can also be the interpreter who interprets the native language to English. Occasions may arise where the I.P.O cannot understand the language of the suspect or accused. In that case, an interpreter will write the statement of the suspect or accused in the native language, read it to the suspect or accused, and interpret it into English (the language of the court). The suspect or accused must understand what has been put down and the interpreter must indicate that he read over the words written to the suspect or accused who understood the same before he signed.

The suspect or accused is only obliged to sign the statement in his native language. It is important in both instances that the I.P.O. as interpreter or whoever else is called to perform that function must give evidence at trial regarding the circumstances under which the statement was taken. Failure to give evidence on oath by the interpreter renders the statement inadmissible. In the instant case, the requirement was met by PW3 and PW5, the Police officers who recorded and interpreted the appellant’s confessional statements, The appellant was cautioned by the Police officer who recorded and took his statements and he was informed of his rights in Hausa, the language he understood and he signed them. Thereafter, the statements were translated into English language, which was duly signed by the Investigating Police Officers as interpreters.

What the Supreme Court decided in Queen v. Okoro (1960) SCNLR 292:

Per OGUNWUMIJU, J.S.C. at page 226, paras C-G:

“With respect to the appellant’s misconceived contention in Queen v. Nnana Okoro (supra), it is in law and facts distinguishable from the instant appeal. The Supreme Court in that case was of the opinion that it might consider the issue but did not give a categorical statement that it would be illegal for the Police officer who took the statement to also interpret the same. All the court said was that “had the statement been the only evidence against the appellant; we might have had to consider whether a conviction thereon was justitied”. Subsequent authorities of this court have walked away from the proposition (if there ever was) that it is undesirable for a Police officer who took the statement to interpret the same. What has been consistent is that the interpreter must be called to give evidence on oath at trial which took place in the instant appeal. These authorities support the consistent position of this court that where the recorder and the interpreter of a statement are the same, so long as the person confirms on oath before the court the circumstances of the taking and recording of the statement, the statement would be admissible’’.

The Language Extra Judicial Statement of an Accused Should be Recorded:

The extra judicial statement of an accused person should be, whenever practicable, be recorded in the language spoken by the accused. The rationale is to avoid technical arguments which could be raised. It is not an invariable practice but one to ensure the correctness and accuracy of the statement made by the accused person. In other words, it is the practice and procedure of the Police to record the statement of the accused person and interpret the same so long as the officer followed the laid down procedure in obtaining the statement of the suspect or accused and the said statement is recorded in the language he understands and it is interpreted to him.

Whether Extra judicial Statement Recorded and Interpreted by Same Person Admissible:

The fact that a statement was recorded and interpreted by one and the same person does not automatically render the statement or confessionalstatement inadmissible, especially where the defendant was represented by a counsel who raised no objection to the admissibility of such document. Once it is shown that the contents of a document were read and interpreted to the accused and he understood the same, such document is admissible. In the instant case, the requirement of the law was complied with as the police officers (PW3 and PW5) who recorded the statements were in court and testified during the trial. They were bound by solemn affirmation to state the truth and there was no form of objection at trial that the exhibits so admitted, being the confessional statements were wrongly interpreted.

The Nature of Work of Police Officers Who Investigate Crime:

Police officers are the organs of State mandated to carry out their duties without let or hindrance and without fear or favour. A police officer investigating a crime is not acting in his own interests and his official actions would not violate any of the twin pillars of natural justice. In the instant case, the investigation of the case by the police officers including the taking of statements from the appellant was not conducted in a manner that compromised the interests of the appellant.

Daniel Bwala: Of context, lying, and denial, By Suyi Ayodele

The ancient Greek philosopher Socrates warned that lies are not harmless distortions of reality; they are assaults on truth itself. Falsehood, he argued, is destructive because it murders truth and corrupts the moral order. Permit me to use his exact words, to wit: “The punishment for a liar is not being believed, even when telling the truth.” His disciple, Plato, carried the argument further.

In The Republic, Plato cautioned that the gravest danger to society comes when those entrusted with public responsibility lose their fidelity to truth. When leaders manipulate truth, the foundations of public trust collapse.

These classical insights provide a useful entry point into the recent outing of Daniel Bwala, Special Adviser on Media and Public Communications to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, during his appearance on Mehdi Hassan’s Head to Head programme on Al Jazeera on March 6, 2026.

The American playwright, Tennessee Williams, once wrote: “The only thing worse than a liar is a liar who is also a hypocrite.” Williams’ point was simple: hypocrisy magnifies the harm of dishonesty because it disguises falsehood in the clothing of moral certainty. A hypocritical liar is therefore doubly dangerous—deceiving others while pretending to stand for virtue. The playwright goes further to submit that hypocritical liars’ ability to combine dishonesty with hypocrisy paints a picture of more deceptive and damaging personalities that lack any atom of integrity.

Another American voice, the celebrated humorist, Mark Twain, observed that “a lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes.” Twain’s wit captured a stubborn reality: falsehood spreads faster than truth, especially in politics. He also popularised the phrase often associated with British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli —“lies, damned lies, and statistics”—a remark that underscores how statistics can either expose deception or be manipulated to sustain it.

Yet Twain also hinted at something deeper about the psychology of lying: when confronted with hard evidence, liars frequently retreat into denial. Whether this reaction springs from embarrassment, self-preservation, or the simple refusal to accept reality is a question for psychologists. But its public consequences are unmistakable.

Twain’s postulations about the reaction of a liar when confronted with statistics, incidentally, find accurate corroboration in the Jacqueline Simpson’s and Steve Roud’s A Dictionary of English Folklores (2003), where the dictionary quotes copiously, a letter written in the British newspaper, National Observer, of June 8, 1891, where the author wrote: “Sir, —It has been wittily remarked that there are three kinds of falsehood: the first is a ‘fib,’ the second is a downright lie, and the third and most aggravated is statistics.”

This psychological drama played out vividly during Bwala’s televised encounter on Head to Head. Over the course of the nearly hour-long programme, the presidential spokesman repeatedly denied or laughed off statements he had previously made about President Tinubu and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

Ironically, many of the positions Bwala took while he was a fierce critic of the Tinubu camp were not inherently illegitimate. In a democratic system, opposition politics often thrives on sharp critique. Indeed, Nigerians will recall how the APC, during its years in opposition to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), aggressively challenged the government’s handling of insecurity and terrorism. The APC then gave open support to banditry and other felonious acts by the outlaws that have taken over Nigeria’s security space for more than a decade now.

The party held the then government in power by the jugular in its efforts to fight terrorists, bandits and other non-state actors bearing illegal weapons and laying waste to Nigerians in their homes, on the highways and on their farms. The APC then, under the late self-acclaimed Mai Gaskiya, General Muhammadu Buhari, fought every attempt made by the PDP-led government to fight the felons terrorising the nation.

Buhari’s popularity, especially among the talakawas of the North, I submit, without equivocation here, rose because of his stance against the action taken by the government to curb the activities of the terrorists. The old and functioning PDP then nicknamed the APC, appropriately too, a Janjaweed party, after the Sudanese Arab Baggara nomad militia group operating in Sahel Region, because the APC tacitly encouraged forces that destabilised the country. In the rough-and-tumble of Nigerian politics, such accusations were part of the partisan arsenal.

It was in that context that Bwala, before joining the Tinubu camp, made several statements accusing the APC and its leadership of dangerous tendencies. At one point he suggested that the party functioned like a militia structure ahead of the 2023 elections. Yet on Al Jazeera he denied ever making such claims—even when the host quoted his words and cited their sources.

For every raw statistic of the abysmal performance index of the government he represents, presented to him and his opinion of the government and personality of the President, Bwala either denied, or claimed ignorance or laughed it off! This clear reversal of position exposed a significant contradiction in his public statements. Nothing can be more embarrassing, more demeaning!

That denial is the crux of the problem. Changing one’s political opinion is not a crime. Democracies are built on the freedom to revise beliefs. But denying statements that are publicly documented—especially when confronted with them—is something else entirely.

What I found most nauseating is the tendency for Bwala to act like a typical pea-brained politician as he alluded to the linguistic principle of contextualisation whenever he was confronted with his past bearings on Tinubu and the APC. Whenever, while the encounter lasted, the presidential aide alluded to ‘context’, what he was saying is: under which condition did I say so? Sad!

Nobody denied that Bwala was acerbic while he was in the opposition. But it is purely bovine of him to throw it at us that anyone in opposition could make claims that he would not be able to stand by in the future when the political permutation changes! That is hogwash! Opposition is not about making slap-happy statements, and being unable to put on one’s thinking cap. It is criminal to claim that a man and his party established a nest of killers in the name of a militia group when you believed that the contrary was the case. It is crass irresponsibility for anyone to claim that another man planned to kill him when he knew that was and is never true.

Those are felonies punishable under the laws of the land. The records are there for all to see, read or watch. Pictures don’t lie. The videos of where Bwala made those outrageous claims on either the Channels TV or Arise TV are there to watch. It speaks more to Bwala’s character, background and fidelity to decency for the elephant which his elder sees in the day time to turn into a rabbit at nightfall!

Opposition elements like Bwala are the main reason why decent opposition politicking has gone to the dogs in Nigeria. He is one, if not the major reason, why our politics and politicking are defined by the anywhere-belle-face philosophy. There should be a limit to shamelessness and Bwala defines that limit! Gosh!

The practice in our clime is for anyone looking for an appointment to adorn the garb of a government critic. To get the attention of the President, all a politician needs to do is to pick on the President and daily pummel him. There are many Bwalas in the Tinubu Presidency. From Bayo Onanuga to the two newly appointed ambassadors, Femi Fani-Kayode and Reno Omokri, even up to the perpetual APC ministerial material, Festus Keyamo, and the PDP’s joy-killer, Nyesom Wike, we have spineless individuals who, had, in the past, interrogated Tinubu’s claims to decency, but, who, today, are his yes-men, defending the very odious things they had accused him of doing or being in the past!

Yes, there is nothing wrong if a man has a change of opinion. But I find it absolutely irreconcilable that the same Tinubu these scatological characters once told us was a drug baron, certificate forger, fund embezzler and a man without ancestry, has suddenly turned to a meteor, representing the best gift of the cosmic to humanity!

Political migration is not new in Nigeria, but the brazenness with which past statements are disowned has become almost theatrical. The most shameful aspect is that when we try to draw their attention to their past opinions of their today’s demigod, they fly in our faces, lying, and asking us to understand the ‘context’ under which they held those opinions!

But that defence stretches credibility. Opposition politics is not a licence for reckless accusation. To allege that a political party organised a militia or that a political leader threatened one’s life is not mere rhetorical flourish; such claims, if knowingly false, approach the territory of defamation and criminal misconduct.

Bwala later argued that he had not been informed beforehand that his past statements would be scrutinised during the interview. That explanation raises a curious question: would prior notice have changed the facts of what he had said? Or would it merely have allowed him time to prepare a more careful defence? Or would he have simply declined to feature on the programme?

Consider, for instance, a tweet he posted in November 2022 on his verified X account: “The human brain is unique and miraculous. It works and functions optically 24 hrs a day, 365 days a year, UNTIL YOU JOIN APC, THEN IT STOPS WORKING.”” That was Bwala speaking as a fierce critic of the party he now represents. The contrast between that Bwala and the one who appeared on Al Jazeera could not be more striking.

Faced with these contradictions, the presidential spokesman repeatedly invoked “context.” In effect, he suggested that statements made in opposition should be interpreted differently once political circumstances change.

The deeper issue here is not simply Bwala’s inconsistency but what it says about the character of contemporary Nigerian politics. The country has become accustomed to politicians who attack a leader fiercely today only to defend him passionately tomorrow once political appointments arrive.

Scholars of African moral philosophy have long warned about the corrosive effects of dishonesty in public life. The linguist Kofi Agyekum notes in his study of Akan proverbs on lying that African moral traditions consistently portray falsehood as a social poison. One Tanzanian proverb captures the point succinctly: “The path of a liar is very short.”

The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche expressed a similar insight when he warned that the greatest danger of lying is not deceiving others but deceiving oneself. A person, who internalises his own lies, Nietzsche argued, eventually loses the ability to distinguish truth from falsehood—and with it, respect for himself and others.

Even Aristotle framed the consequences with devastating simplicity: the ultimate punishment for a liar is that he will not be believed even when he speaks the truth.

That is the moral of the Bwala episode. Once public trust is eroded, it becomes difficult—sometimes impossible—to restore. Videos do not forget; archives do not fade; and the internet preserves statements long after their authors would prefer them buried.

Bwala’s family, friends, and political associates have surely seen the footage of his Al Jazeera appearance and the earlier recordings of the statements he denied. They have also seen the avalanche of reactions that followed. For them, the question is not merely political but personal: what image of a man does such a spectacle project?

The Irish writer Michael Scott once remarked that the most convincing lie is often built around a kernel of truth. Perhaps that insight explains the paradox at the heart of Bwala’s predicament. His earlier criticisms of the Tinubu camp may have contained elements of genuine conviction. But by denying them outright, he has transformed what might have been a legitimate change of political position into a spectacle of contradiction.

Ironically, the most fitting commentary on the episode comes from Bwala himself. In 2022 he declared that the human brain works constantly—until one joins the APC. If his recent performance is any indication, those words now return to haunt their author.

As the Yoruba would say, when an elder sees an elephant in broad daylight, it cannot suddenly become a rabbit at nightfall. Truth may be delayed, but it rarely disappears. And when it returns, it demands recognition.

The views expressed by contributors are strictly personal and not of Law & Society Magazine.

With fair laws, equal opportunities, we gain safer societies, stronger economies — FIDA Global President

I extend warm greetings  on behalf of the International Federation of Women Lawyers  (FIDA) to women and girls across the world. 

The dual themes, ‘’Give to Gain” and “Rights. Justice. Action. For  ALL Women and Girls” remind us that every time we give women  and girls access to justice, protection of rights under the law,  mentorship, resources and opportunities, we do not lose.

On the  contrary, we create a fairer world for everyone and thereby  multiply progress for our families, communities and nations. 

As women lawyers, we renew our commitment to use the law as a  tool to give voice to the voiceless, to challenge discrimination and  to defend the rights and interests of all women and girls, especially  those most vulnerable. 

I call on governments, institutions, and individuals to invest in legal  empowerment of women, strengthen systems that prevent and  respond to violence, and ensure that no woman is left behind in  accessing her rights. 

When we give fair laws, equal opportunities, and compassionate  advocacy, we gain safer societies, stronger economies, and a more  just world. 

Happy International Women’s Day.

Ezinwa Okoroafor  Global President

FIDA Grand Bahama marks International Women’s Day with tribute to former Global President Jethlyn Aletha Burrows

On this International Women’s Day, the International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) Grand Bahama Chapter proudly honors the life and enduring legacy of Mrs. Jethlyn Aletha Burrows, née Musgrove — an esteemed Counsel and Attorney-at-Law, former judicial officer, and devoted advocate for justice, equality, and women’s rights.

Born on October 9, 1955, in Nassau, New Providence, Mrs. Burrows embodied academic excellence and public service from an early age. A distinguished graduate of Queen Mary College, University of London, she initially pursued a career in education, earning advanced qualifications in teaching before answering her calling to the law. She was admitted to The Bahamas Bar in 1988, marking the beginning of a formidable legal career defined by intellect, integrity, and service.

Over the course of more than three decades, Mrs. Burrows served the Commonwealth of The Bahamas with distinction. Her career spanned private practice, public service, and the   judiciary. She held pivotal roles within the Ministry of Consumer Affairs and the Registrar General’s Department, where she played a foundational role in establishing and leading the Freeport branch. In 1995, she was appointed Stipendiary and Circuit Magistrate, later advancing to Deputy Registrar of the Supreme Court and Vice President of the Bahamas Industrial Tribunal’s Northern Region, where she adjudicated complex labor and industrial disputes with fairness and precision.

Following her retirement from the judiciary in 2011, Mrs. Burrows returned to private practice, eventually establishing Musgrove Burrows Law Chambers in 2016. Her work spanned employment law, family law, civil litigation, and alternative dispute resolution, reflecting both breadth and depth of expertise. In 2020, she earned a Diploma in International Arbitration from the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, further strengthening her commitment to progressive and equitable legal processes.

It was within FIDA, however, that Mrs. Burrows’ global impact on women’s rights was most profoundly felt. A member since 1993, she rose to serve as Regional Vice President for North America and the Caribbean and, notably, as International President from 2014 to 2017. During her tenure, she championed initiatives advancing gender equality, access to justice, and legal protections for women and girls worldwide. She also proudly hosted FIDA’s 36th International Convention on Grand Bahama in 2017 — a historic milestone for the region and a testament to her leadership on the world stage. It was during the 38th Triennial Convention held in Cali, Colombia, from the 4th to the 8th November 2024 that Jethlyn was awarded the prestigious Lifetime Achievement Award, in recognition of her exemplary commitment to advancing the organization’s goals and her lifetime dedication to women ’s rights and the legal profession. This award, a high honor presented at each Triennial International Convention, is given to a prominent female attorney who epitomizes the values and mission of FIDA.

Beyond the courtroom, Mrs. Burrows was a dedicated Anglican, long-standing Vestry member, community servant, and mentor. A Distinguished Toastmaster and active member of Pilot International, she believed deeply in service, leadership development, and uplifting others. She balanced her professional accomplishments with devotion to her family, sharing 39 years of marriage with her husband, Wilfred “Gary” Burrows who predeceased her, and raising two sons grounded in the same values of integrity and service that defined her life.

Mrs. Burrows’ untimely passing has left a profound void within the legal community, the women’s movement, and the nation at large. Yet her legacy endures — in the institutions she strengthened, the women she empowered, the laws she helped shape, and the countless lives she touched. On this International Women’s Day, FIDA Grand Bahama honors Mrs. Jethlyn Aletha Burrows posthumously in recognition of her extraordinary contribution to the advancement of women’s rights, the administration of justice, and the development of legal leadership in The Bahamas and beyond. Her life stands as a powerful reminder that leadership rooted in integrity, compassion, and courage leaves a lasting imprint on generations to come.

Culture Meets Confidence: Women celebrate International Women’s Day with SAP’s inspiring saree run

In a vibrant celebration of strength, culture and sisterhood, global technology company SAP marked International Women’s Day 2026 with “HER RUN By SAP,” a unique health, safety and well-being initiative designed to spotlight the resilience and unity of women.

The celebration which focused on community, wellness, and empowerment, featured a run for employees and their families, as well as health initiatives like bone density check-ups and breast cancer screening.

More than a fitness event, the initiative which was flagged off by Sindhu Gangadharan, MD of SAP Labs India, transformed the simple act of running into a powerful cultural statement. Women participants took to the course dressed in sarees, blending India’s timeless tradition with a modern display of confidence, determination and collective empowerment.

Organizers described the event as a celebration where culture meets courage, underscoring the message that women can embrace both heritage and progress while redefining boundaries.

Held as part of SAP’s broader commitment to workplace wellness and gender inclusion, the event sought to encourage women to prioritize their health while also strengthening networks of solidarity and support.

Participants said the run symbolized far more than athletic endurance. Running in sarees—an attire often associated with grace and tradition—became a statement of resilience, identity and pride, reinforcing the idea that women’s strength can flourish without abandoning cultural roots.

As the world commemorates International Women’s Day 2026, initiatives like HER RUN highlight the growing movement to celebrate women not only for their achievements but also for their courage to lead, inspire and redefine possibilities.

For many who joined the event, every stride was a reminder that empowered women move society forward, together.

‘Justice Must Move Faster’: FIDA Nigeria sounds alarm over delays facing abuse survivors

A woman walks into a police station in Nigeria to report abuse. She is told to come back later.

A girl gathers the courage to speak about violence against her and is advised to remain silent.

A survivor enters a courtroom carrying both trauma and hope, uncertain which one will leave with her.

As the world marks International Women’s Day 2026, the International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) Nigeria says these stories are not rare exceptions. they are everyday realities for many women and girls seeking justice across the country.

And the organization is warning that unless urgent reforms are implemented, the promise of rights, justice, and protection for millions of Nigerian women will remain little more than words on paper.

In a statement released to mark the global event, FIDA Nigeria said that across the country, countless women and girls seeking justice for abuse and violence are still confronted with delays, silence, and institutional barriers.

A Call for Enforcement, Not Symbolism

FIDA Nigeria said this year’s International Women’s Day theme, “Rights, Justice and Action for All Women and Girls” must go beyond ceremonial declarations.

Instead, the organization urged authorities to focus on enforcement, accountability, and measurable progress in protecting women’s rights.

“Justice must not depend on geography, income, ethnicity, disability, or social status,” the group stated.

“Every woman and girl is entitled to dignity, safety, and equality before the law.”

‘Justice Must Move at the Speed of Urgency’

Speaking on the significance of the day, Elina Martins, Country Vice President of International Federation of Women Lawyers Nigeria, said the celebration must not become symbolic while survivors continue to navigate a justice system that often fails them.

“International Women’s Day must not be reduced to celebration while many women continue to navigate broken systems. Justice must move at the speed of urgency, not bureaucracy,” she said.

Survivors Still Face Barriers

According to FIDA Nigeria, survivors of gender-based violence continue to encounter major obstacles when seeking justice.

These include delayed investigations, weak prosecution, stigma, and inconsistent accountability within the legal system.

“When cases stall and protection mechanisms fail, the justice system falls short of its responsibility to defend the vulnerable,” the organization said.

Focus on the Most Vulnerable

FIDA Nigeria also warned that women and girls facing multiple layers of vulnerability remain particularly exposed.

These include women with disabilities, those living in rural or conflict-affected communities, and economically marginalized populations.

“Reforms that do not prioritize the most vulnerable remain incomplete,” the organization said.

Key Reforms Proposed

The legal advocacy group called on government institutions and policymakers to take concrete steps to strengthen the protection of women and girls.

Among its recommendations are:

  • stronger enforcement of gender-protective laws
  • reduced procedural delays within the justice system
  • expanded access to free legal aid and survivor support services
  • gender-responsive budgeting
  • transparent monitoring of enforcement mechanisms
  • sustained public education to challenge harmful stereotypes

The organization warned that declarations without implementation risk weakening public trust in institutions.

A National Development Issue

FIDA Nigeria emphasized that the protection of women’s rights is not only a social issue but a fundamental pillar of national stability and development.

“When women and girls cannot access justice, the rule of law weakens,” the statement said.

“When violence goes unpunished, public confidence erodes. And when inequality persists, national development slows.”

Commitment to Legal Advocacy

Despite the challenges, the organization reaffirmed its commitment to expanding free legal aid, strategic litigation, and policy advocacy across Nigeria.

The statement was signed by Elina Martins, Country Vice President of FIDA Nigeria, and Chineze Obianyo, the organization’s National Publicity Secretary.

As Nigeria continues broader efforts at institutional reform, FIDA Nigeria said International Women’s Day 2026 must mark more than celebration, it must signal visible progress.

#Rights must be protected.
#Justice must be delivered.
#Action must be sustained.

1...767778...1,424Page 77 of 1,424

TIPS

Load more